For all you bitches bitching about (insert 10 million things here), I would like to see your Junior GM What You Would Have Done. Just the first 3 rounds, please, anything beyond that is vomit.

Use the picks as they existed coming into the draft (4, 22, 37, 67). Obviously, a trade up to #3 and a trade down to #87 are viable options - any other trade scenario is vomit.

If you choose to stay at 4 and draft Trent Richardson, please also provide what you would do if he were picked at 3. If you choose to take Weeden at 37, again provide what you would do if he were gone.

Here be mine:

#4 - Trade up to 3, get Trent Richardson. There's a real chance Tampa (or someone) will jump me to get him and I don't want to chance it since I feel that the options that follow are clear steps down.

#22 - Riley Reiff (or whomever I had ranked as the best RT in the draft). No WR's I feel are 1st round quality left on the board, I want Weeden, but I think I can get him at 37.

#37 - Brandon Weeden. Because he's the 3rd best QB in the draft at a bargain spot and I really like the way he throws the ball and Colt McCoy sucks. IF Weeden's not there, then Stephen Hill.

#67 - First, if I got Weeden, I'd try like hell to trade back up and get Hill. If that wasn't possible, then Best Defensive Player Available (probably a DE like Olivier Vernon). My D needs some love too. If I got Weeden at 37, then I might consider WR here, but none of the WR's left are interesting enough that I can't get a comparable guy a little later. It's not like you draft a 3rd round WR and say "Hot dog! Got my #1 Receiver!" And if I took Hill at 37, I don't need a WR anyway.

I don't take a QB here since any 3rd rd QB is gonna be a developmental deal and you can get those later on (which is an agreement with Peeks that the Browns made an error drafting a guy like Colt in the 3rd).

#4 - Stay at 4, draft Richardson if there, Claiborne if not. Obviously as I said before the draft, I would have been trying to trade with St Louis who wanted Blackmon or Kalil if that scenario happened, but that is moot for this excercise.

#22 - De Castro if I got T-Rich, Reiff if I got Claiborne.#37 - Jon Martin (T Rich) Stephen Hill (Claiborne)#67 - Best Available WR (T Rich) Lammar Miller (if I got Claiborne)or I would have thought long and hard if Weeden was still available, which I suspect with 20/20 hindsight he very well may have been. I think I would have taken him.

Its hard to do this honestly knowing the results, I did the best I could. I def can't say I would have considered Weeden before the third.

JCoz wrote:#4 - Stay at 4, draft Richardson if there, Claiborne if not. Obviously as I said before the draft, I would have been trying to trade with St Louis who wanted Blackmon or Kalil if that scenario happened, but that is moot for this excercise.

#22 - De Castro if I got T-Rich, Reiff if I got Claiborne.#37 - Jon Martin (T Rich) Stephen Hill (Claiborne)#67 - Best Available WR (T Rich) Lammar Miller (if I got Claiborne)or I would have thought long and hard if Weeden was still available, which I suspect with 20/20 hindsight he very well may have been. I think I would have taken him.

Its hard to do this honestly knowing the results, I did the best I could. I def can't say I would have considered Weeden before the third.

So, let's review this Claiborne strategy: After the first round, you'd have added... ZERO offensive playmakers. At 37, you get the FOURTH best WR. And at 67, you get the FOURTH RB. And here I could have sworn the 2011 Browns' offense was hideously unwatchable.

JCoz wrote:#4 - Stay at 4, draft Richardson if there, Claiborne if not. Obviously as I said before the draft, I would have been trying to trade with St Louis who wanted Blackmon or Kalil if that scenario happened, but that is moot for this excercise.

#22 - De Castro if I got T-Rich, Reiff if I got Claiborne.#37 - Jon Martin (T Rich) Stephen Hill (Claiborne)#67 - Best Available WR (T Rich) Lammar Miller (if I got Claiborne)or I would have thought long and hard if Weeden was still available, which I suspect with 20/20 hindsight he very well may have been. I think I would have taken him.

Its hard to do this honestly knowing the results, I did the best I could. I def can't say I would have considered Weeden before the third.

So, let's review this Claiborne strategy: After the first round, you'd have added... ZERO offensive playmakers. At 37, you get the FOURTH best WR. And at 67, you get the FOURTH RB. And here I could have sworn the 2011 Browns' offense was hideously unwatchable.

OT's don't play offense? The FOURTH best WR in a draft usually ends up contributing, no? Who would you have taken? Or are you just going to point out the obvious and throw out emoticons?

You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves-----Abe Lincoln

Let me tell you, if any of you douchebag empty headed stuffed suit nanny politicians tries to fuck with my bacon, I’m going after you like a crazed chimpanzee on bath salts. -----Lars

1. Whatever Heckert did is fine with me.2. Whatever Hiko would have done.3. Whatever JCoz would have done.4. The exact opposite of what CDT would have done.

4. Richardson or Claiborne22. Reiff or DeCastro37. Weeden (but only because I had already announced to the world when I lost RG3 that McCoy was out). Personally I would have been thrilled with Reiff/DeCastro at 22 and Glenn/Schwartz/Massie at 37 to have my line set for years or taken a HR back like Isaiah Pead.67. Fine with trade back to 87 but I'm taking Chris Givens/Devon Wylie/Joe Adams at that point.

That gives me my elite guy at 4, my OL at 22, the QB at 37 (if he's there and if not I have my OL set or big play RB) and a much better (IMO) WR who also has KR/PR creds that can replace Old Josh Cribbs.

I find it funny that prior to the draft it was almost 100% accepted by many of you telling me the 22nd pick was justified, that the Browns had missed out on QB this season when they lost RG3 sweepstakes and that taking one in RD1 would be foolish.

No one wanted Tannehill and no one was even considering taking for Weeden.

I would have, from day one, let Minnesota know that the top two players on my board were TRich and Kalil, and that we had absolutely no interest in #3, cause we'd gladly take whichever one fell to us. Would have taken all their leverage away. Instead, these assholes that think they're smarter than everyone else in the league were overselling TRich because their egos were bruised from getting RG3 swiped out from under their noses. Every insider in the league knew exactly who the Browns wanted. I heard the pompous pricks actually ran the card up there before Goodell announced the RG3 pick.

So Minnesota was able to just have their way with us. Three picks, buh-bye. For being idiots. They got fleeced. I would NOT have traded up. I would have traded down, ideally, and Jacksonville or Dallas woulda moved up. And gone BPA (Floyd, Gilmore with the Jax pick) and added another high pick.

I would have taken Reilly Reiff at #22 and made him my RT for the next decade. At #37, depending on who I got with my 1st pick, I woulda gone with Weeden one of the second tier of RBs (which I liked) or Stephen Hill or Joe Adams. With the pick I got from Jacksonville from trading down, I woulda taken someone from that group or Cousins.

By not getting fleeced out of three picks, I would have had a shitload of picks in rd 4-7. I would have used those picks on another offensive linemen, 3-4 wide recievers, 2-3 cornerbacks. And some D prospects with flaws but upside.

And taken John Hughes with our last pick in the 7th.

"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

JCoz wrote:#4 - Stay at 4, draft Richardson if there, Claiborne if not. Obviously as I said before the draft, I would have been trying to trade with St Louis who wanted Blackmon or Kalil if that scenario happened, but that is moot for this excercise.

#22 - De Castro if I got T-Rich, Reiff if I got Claiborne.#37 - Jon Martin (T Rich) Stephen Hill (Claiborne)#67 - Best Available WR (T Rich) Lammar Miller (if I got Claiborne)or I would have thought long and hard if Weeden was still available, which I suspect with 20/20 hindsight he very well may have been. I think I would have taken him.

Its hard to do this honestly knowing the results, I did the best I could. I def can't say I would have considered Weeden before the third.

So, let's review this Claiborne strategy: After the first round, you'd have added... ZERO offensive playmakers. At 37, you get the FOURTH best WR. And at 67, you get the FOURTH RB. And here I could have sworn the 2011 Browns' offense was hideously unwatchable.

It definitely had the potential for another unwatchable offense. But it was drafting the best players that could be long term solutions at positions of need. If there were different players at the sexy positions I would be drafting those. It certainly wasn't a one year plan to fix everything....

swerb wrote:I would have, from day one, let Minnesota know that the top two players on my board were TRich and Kalil, and that we had absolutely no interest in #3, cause we'd gladly take whichever one fell to us. Would have taken all their leverage away. Instead, these assholes that think they're smarter than everyone else in the league were overselling TRich because their egos were bruised from getting RG3 swiped out from under their noses. Every insider in the league knew exactly who the Browns wanted. I heard the pompous pricks actually ran the card up there before Goodell announced the RG3 pick.

So Minnesota was able to just have their way with us. Three picks, buh-bye. For being idiots. They got fleeced. I would NOT have traded up. I would have traded down, ideally, and Jacksonville or Dallas woulda moved up. And gone BPA (Floyd, Gilmore with the Jax pick) and added another high pick.

I would have taken Reilly Reiff at #22 and made him my RT for the next decade. At #37, depending on who I got with my 1st pick, I woulda gone with Weeden one of the second tier of RBs (which I liked) or Stephen Hill or Joe Adams. With the pick I got from Jacksonville from trading down, I woulda taken someone from that group or Cousins.

By not getting fleeced out of three picks, I would have had a shitload of picks in rd 4-7. I would have used those picks on another offensive linemen, 3-4 wide recievers, 2-3 cornerbacks. And some D prospects with flaws but upside.

And taken John Hughes with our last pick in the 7th.

The 4th, 5th and 7th you handed over in an act of Jus Prima Noctis could have also been (theoretically of course) used to move back into the 3rd round where there was still talent to be had.

But someone said 'Boo' you shit down your leg, and offered your wallet and car keys instead.

JCoz wrote:It definitely had the potential for another unwatchable offense. But it was drafting the best players that could be long term solutions at positions of need. If there were different players at the sexy positions I would be drafting those. It certainly wasn't a one year plan to fix everything....

This is the key.

The fact Walrus and Co. have wet themselves thus far means Jammies is geting pissy and H&H are getting squirrely.

JB told me last week Lane isn't wrong. And Lane said the Browns didn't have Weeden on their first round board.

They panicked, picked a guy who MAY have a better chance next year to win than Colt (although I'm pretty sure Wallace does too) even though he wasn't on their board.

You couldn't fix everything, you're right. And the spot they should have left for the next year was QB as many people here and in the know had believed after RG3 was lost.

It's Negotiation 101. First thing you do is try to do everything you can to minimize the leverage of who you're negotiating with. I would have been donating to all Kalil's favorite charities, talked publicly about how elite he is and how he would be our RT for a decade, and sent 150 people to his pro day.

These guys are effing idiots. Especially Holmgren. He is a pompous prick idiot. Who has no clue how to build a GD football team, especially one from scratch.

Three picks gone. Cause they're morons. Which yes, could have been used to move back up.

Huge reach on a QB they could have gotten later. They left this draft with no wide receivers. Drafting guys not even on anyones board in rd 3. They interviewed Hughes's college coach. All he could muster was that they were getting good character. Amazing. The RT ... we'll see.

They think they're smarter than everyone else. Trying to be cute. While Kevin Colbert, Ozzie Newsome, and even the god damn Bengals clean their clock in the draft every year and make them look like morons.

"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

JCoz wrote:It definitely had the potential for another unwatchable offense. But it was drafting the best players that could be long term solutions at positions of need. If there were different players at the sexy positions I would be drafting those. It certainly wasn't a one year plan to fix everything....

This is the key.

The fact Walrus and Co. have wet themselves thus far means Jammies is geting pissy and H&H are getting squirrely.

JB told me last week Lane isn't wrong. And Lane said the Browns didn't have Weeden on their first round board.

They panicked, picked a guy who MAY have a better chance next year to win than Colt (although I'm pretty sure Wallace does too) even though he wasn't on their board.

You couldn't fix everything, you're right. And the spot they should have left for the next year was QB as many people here and in the know had believed after RG3 was lost.

They reached and cost this club better options.

The rest is all ashes.

SD:

You and Swerb nailed it .

They got beat like stoopid tricks .

giving up 5 picks for two guys when they were in position to turn two guys into five is all you need to know.

The only positive is the fact , these bitches are now on the clock .

randy put his foot up their asses , and they responded like stoopid hos who been pimped whipped .

Planes trains and automobiles they better get them donuts .(props to Delante)

swerb wrote:I would have, from day one, let Minnesota know that the top two players on my board were TRich and Kalil, and that we had absolutely no interest in #3, cause we'd gladly take whichever one fell to us.

At this point I had to stop reading, because my inner Vikings GM was rolling in laughter that we'd seriously think of drafting a RT at #4.

"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT

swerb wrote:I would have, from day one, let Minnesota know that the top two players on my board were TRich and Kalil, and that we had absolutely no interest in #3, cause we'd gladly take whichever one fell to us.

At this point I had to stop reading, because my inner Vikings GM was rolling in laughter that we'd seriously think of drafting a RT at #4.

I'd have rather they done that, in all honesty, than roll over and give up 3 picks for the back. And yeah, I know he good he might be.

And I would have HATED the RT at #4.

Which tells ya something more

Stay at #4. You likely get TRich and at worst YOU can make a trade down and pick up extra guys if you don't like Kalil or Claiborne. The Bills probably call along with others.

4. I would not have traded up, and I'm a gigantic TR fan. I go TR, and if he's gone then Claiborne. 22. Reiff is my choice, regardless of who we took earlier. I'm no OL expert, so if the FO had Schwartz rated higher than Reiff and planned on taking Schwartz to be the RT at 37, then I take DeCastro here as my RG, and set up the OL to be elite (on paper) for the next decade.37. Best RT if we went DeCastro at 22, and Stephen Hill if we went Reiff.67. Best WR if we didn't take Hill. If we have Hill/Claiborne, I trade down to 87 and take Lamar Miller, who wins ROY running behind that line. If we have Hill/TR, I take the best pass rusher available.

That leaves me with either:TRichReiff/SchwartzHill/DeCastroPass Rusher/WR

OR

ClaiborneReiff/SchwartzHill/DeCastroMiller/WR

I still like any of those myriad scenarios better than what actually happened. Barely any hindsight in there. That's the draft plan I went in with, and was ecstatic when Reiff AND DeCastro were there at 22.

I'm not bitching about what did go down (although I have been plenty), just following the instructions given for this thread.

CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07! wrote:4. I would not have traded up, and I'm a gigantic TR fan. I go TR, and if he's gone then Claiborne. 22. Reiff is my choice, regardless of who we took earlier. I'm no OL expert, so if the FO had Schwartz rated higher than Reiff and planned on taking Schwartz to be the RT at 37, then I take DeCastro here as my RG, and set up the OL to be elite (on paper) for the next decade.37. Best RT if we went DeCastro at 22, and Stephen Hill if we went Reiff.67. Best WR if we didn't take Hill. If we have Hill/Claiborne, I trade down to 87 and take Lamar Miller, who wins ROY running behind that line. If we have Hill/TR, I take the best pass rusher available.

That leaves me with either:TRichReiff/SchwartzHill/DeCastroPass Rusher/WR

OR

ClaiborneReiff/SchwartzHill/DeCastroMiller/WR

I still like any of those myriad scenarios better than what actually happened. Barely any hindsight in there. That's the draft plan I went in with, and was ecstatic when Reiff AND DeCastro were there at 22.

I'm not bitching about what did go down (although I have been plenty), just following the instructions given for this thread.

I think there were a lot of people who were pumped when those guys were there at 22 I agree with you 100%.....not looking forward to playing DeCastro twice a year, the guy is a monster.

Getting fleeced would be something like what could potentially happen with the Skins, if RG3 delivers anything less than a shot at a Super Bowl.

Getting fleeced is the 89 Vikings for trading away 3 Super Bowls worth of potential to get Herschel Walker.

You gave up next to nothing just to ensure you got the best guy available. And believe me, if the rumors were to be believed, this one did have legs. I, like Hiko said earlier, were prepping for the worst.

Sorry, I'm just tired of this take. Oh, and I bet good money, had someone else beat us to the punch, the same people with the "Getting fleeced" talk, would be the ones whining that Heckert and Holmgren idly sat on their hands, had someone in fact made the trade up.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

#4: I'm not trading up...no way. I do believe Tampa was in the running, it makes sense on the board and for them as a team, but I still call their bluff and stand pat.T Rich if he is there, Blackmon if he is not.

#22: If I have T-Rich I am taking Reiff (even though I'm not sure he ever played RT), if I have Blackmon I still take Reiff.

#37: Weeden no matter what which scenario above plays out

#67: If I have Blackmon I take the same guy the Broncs took; Hillman. If I don't have Blackmon I take Sanu here:

Getting fleeced would be something like what could potentially happen with the Skins, if RG3 delivers anything less than a shot at a Super Bowl.

Getting fleeced is the 89 Vikings for trading away 3 Super Bowls worth of potential to get Herschel Walker.

You gave up next to nothing just to ensure you got the best guy available. And believe me, if the rumors were to be believed, this one did have legs. I, like Hiko said earlier, were prepping for the worst.

Sorry, I'm just tired of this take. Oh, and I bet good money, had someone else beat us to the punch, the same people with the "Getting fleeced" talk, would be the ones whining that Heckert and Holmgren idly sat on their hands, had someone in fact made the trade up.

Except for the guys WE took in rounds 4-7. Those guys are interesting prospects who will surely provide depth and a couple of whom may blossom into All Pro types. That's what I hear from Browns fans anyway.

Not sure how we can say they're useless and potentially diamonds in the rough in the same breath.

peeker643 wrote:Except for the guys WE took in rounds 4-7. Those guys are interesting prospects who will surely provide depth and a couple of whom may blossom into All Pro types. That's what I hear from Browns fans anyway.

Not sure how we can say they're useless and potentially diamonds in the rough in the same breath.

Wait... yes I am...

Are there really any people here who think any of the guys 4-7 are going to be all pros? I guess I'm not reading enough posts lately.

I see people seeing a little LBer depth and a deep threat. Maybe people have entirely different opinions about what token speed guy gives.

I mean, I'm not sure you feel any differently than I do on this, but 4-7 is by and large- trash. I'm sure you don't think we were walking into camp with 13 draftees and 5-8 UDFA's right? Where those picks hurt in my view was turning John Hughes into a mid-late 2nd rounder like Hill/Jeffery or Lavonte David/Zach Brown....

I doubt you think differently but it gets lost in the late round hypocrisy angle, which I'm still not sure which person on the board has actually stated that late rounders are trash but ours will be all pro's......

peeker643 wrote:Except for the guys WE took in rounds 4-7. Those guys are interesting prospects who will surely provide depth and a couple of whom may blossom into All Pro types. That's what I hear from Browns fans anyway.

Not sure how we can say they're useless and potentially diamonds in the rough in the same breath.

Wait... yes I am...

Are there really any people here who think any of the guys 4-7 are going to be all pros? I guess I'm not reading enough posts lately.

I see people seeing a little LBer depth and a deep threat. Maybe people have entirely different opinions about what token speed guy gives.

I mean, I'm not sure you feel any differently than I do on this, but 4-7 is by and large- trash. I'm sure you don't think we were walking into camp with 13 draftees and 5-8 UDFA's right? Where those picks hurt in my view was turning John Hughes into a mid-late 2nd rounder like Hill/Jeffery or Lavonte David/Zach Brown....

I doubt you think differently but it gets lost in the late round hypocrisy angle, which I'm still not sure which person on the board has actually stated that late rounders are trash but ours will be all pro's......

Goodness, you're a literal one.

"All Pro" is complete hyperbole. But look at the Day 3 thread again. Are those picks useless or are they not? I don't think they are useless in the least.

And, as you stated, those picks are at the very least are currency to be used to go back and forth in the draft to get guys you like. We both agree you don't just give them away. Especially 4th round picks.

And my opinion is they gave 4,5 and 7 away to get a guy they liked when they didn't have to or when the alternative to doing so (staying at #4 overall) would have netted as impactful a guy as the one you took at #3 if not the very same guy.

No way they bring 13 draftees to camp. Heckert said that a week before the draft.

I just think 4, 5 and 7 could have been used alone to move back in the 3rd round or so. And when you suck as deeply as the Browns do you don't spend foolishly.

'Fer Fucks sake, people. It's amazing to me that swerb, peek, etc. are obsessed over losing a 4th, 5th and 7th rounder. Let's assume they're right and that the Browns "negotiated against themselves." Uh, SO WHAT? You still had another pick in those rounds, and really, if the future of the franchise hinges on Day 3 picks, we might as well go home and call the whole thing off anyway.

Now, what I would change doesn't start until Day 2. Take Hill at 37, RT at 67 OR move back up for Schwartz if you're that high on him. That negates Hughes at 87. Otherwise, that's it.

CleSportsTruth wrote:'Fer Fucks sake, people. It's amazing to me that swerb, peek, etc. are obsessed over losing a 4th, 5th and 7th rounder. Let's assume they're right and that the Browns "negotiated against themselves." Uh, SO WHAT? You still had another pick in those rounds, and really, if the future of the franchise hinges on Day 3 picks, we might as well go home and call the whole thing off anyway.

Now, what I would change doesn't start until Day 2. Take Hill at 37, RT at 67 OR move back up for Schwartz if you're that high on him. That negates Hughes at 87. Otherwise, that's it.

Well, I have three cars that me and my family use. I could probably make due with two, maybe even with one.

Yet I'm not giving any away for no reason whatsoever because they have some value TO ME.

Maybe you do give shit away to people who ask for it.

Maybe you and the Browns are very generous or very stupid.

I'd bet one of the family cars on stupid.

ETA: Please don't make me go down the list of guys in the league, All Pros for that matter, who were selected 4th round or later. Or starters in general. Those rounds have low hit rates. That's precisely why the more of them you have the better chance you come away with a player.

And giving away picks is just bad effing business in general. You don't spend stupid when you have limited resources and multiple needs.

pup wrote:Not even sure why there is a 4th round in drafts at this point.

The NBA draft used to be 10 rounds. TEN!!Now its two.

I'm thinking Pup was being sarcastic since no one cares that picks after the 4th were dealt to move up a single spot.

BTW- I'd be willing to bet every single team in the league has a 4th through 7th round draft pick starting on it. And I'd bet nearly every single team has a lineman they think highly of who was drafted 4th-7th. That's where you find a lot of those guys.

Is CleSportsTruth telling me the Browns are good enough there? They're set. They don't need another bite at the apple or two to see if they can find those critical guys?

pup wrote:Not even sure why there is a 4th round in drafts at this point.

The NBA draft used to be 10 rounds. TEN!!Now its two.

I'm thinking Pup was being sarcastic since no one cares that picks after the 4th were dealt to move up a single spot.

BTW- I'd be willing to bet every single team in the league has a 4th through 7th round draft pick starting on it. And I'd bet nearly every single team has a lineman they think highly of who was drafted 4th-7th. That's where you find a lot of those guys.

Is CleSportsTruth telling me the Browns are good enough there? They're set. They don't need another bite at the apple or two to see if they can find those critical guys?

I wasn't making a case for shortening the draft to 4 rounds. Just pointing fun at the old NBA draft. You have 12 guys on your team already, and you needed a 10 round draft?? In the NFL, you have quite a few more roster spots to fill than the NBA.

"The nose of the bulldog has been slanted backwards so that he can breathe without letting go." -- Winston Churchill

1. Richardson, if not available trade down into the 9-12 range and grab an extra #2 and either Floyd or Wright. (If I thought Shurmur could call useful running plays instead of 20 HB dives, i'd be for the trade up)2. DeCastro/Reiff.3. Weeden if available; if not Weeden, grab if not Martin to go with Floyd/Wright or RR/Hill to go with Richardson. (disclaimer: Hill has massive bust potential and I havent watched him play)4. Assuming Wheedon is there at 37, grab RR/Hillman.

Would have liked McNutt in that later rounds, love the Benjamin pick, and *like* the Wheedon pick, just not at 22.

Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.

JCoz wrote:It definitely had the potential for another unwatchable offense. But it was drafting the best players that could be long term solutions at positions of need. If there were different players at the sexy positions I would be drafting those. It certainly wasn't a one year plan to fix everything....

This is the key.

The fact Walrus and Co. have wet themselves thus far means Jammies is geting pissy and H&H are getting squirrely.

JB told me last week Lane isn't wrong. And Lane said the Browns didn't have Weeden on their first round board.

They panicked, picked a guy who MAY have a better chance next year to win than Colt (although I'm pretty sure Wallace does too) even though he wasn't on their board.

You couldn't fix everything, you're right. And the spot they should have left for the next year was QB as many people here and in the know had believed after RG3 was lost.

They reached and cost this club better options.

The rest is all ashes.

SD:

You and Swerb nailed it .

They got beat like stoopid tricks .

giving up 5 picks for two guys when they were in position to turn two guys into five is all you need to know.

The only positive is the fact , these bitches are now on the clock .

randy put his foot up their asses , and they responded like stoopid hos who been pimped whipped .

Planes trains and automobiles they better get them donuts .(props to Delante)

SoulDawg

Peeker, WTF are you talking about with Lane o any insider info from another board?